It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Natural Born Citizen

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You say you aren't 'American.' What is your citizenship? I am curious.

(Full disclosure: I am a dual U.S./Canadian citizen that lives in the U.S and has never lived in Canada.)



edit on 2/10/2018 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you missed

Note: his statute has been codified in the United States Code at Title 8, Sec. 1401(b)"

1401 (b) didn't exist before that. It wasn't an addition of Indians to "all the tribes all over the world". It was and is still limited to "American Indians".

You probably also missed:

The Act did not include citizens born before the effective date of the 1924 act, or outside of the United States as an indigenous person, however, and it was not until the Nationality Act of 1940 that all born on U.S. soil were citizens.

The underlined part is what I have been saying and it seems like the bold part, Nationality Act of 1940, kills your argument. You might want to look into that.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

All born on U.S. soil are not U.S. citizens. Hence the provision in 8 USC 1401 (b).

It's clear.

Read it.

Sorry you don't like it. But that doesn't make you correct.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Why would I hate it? I actually said you could have used foreign diplomats as an example.

I am correct about your interpretation that 8 USC 1401 (b) applies to tribes worldwide, which is what I was pointing out with:

You are grasping at straws. US law only applies to tribes in US territories and not other countries.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Why would I hate it? I actually said you could have used foreign diplomats as an example.

I am correct about your interpretation that 8 USC 1401 (b) applies to tribes worldwide, which is what I was pointing out with:

You are grasping at straws. US law only applies to tribes in US territories and not other countries.

Given that Eskimo and Aleutian tribes can found outside the U.S., you have no leg to stand on.

So tired, it's late. Your argument is lame. Cherry picked. Broken. Truncated.

Not worth another minute of my time.

Obviously, I am correct. Why would the U.S. claim to have MORE jurisdiction over a tribe located in a foreign country than one on U.S. soil? They wouldn't. They couldn't.

Your argument is laughable. Nonsensical. Illogical on its face. Wrong.

Anyone in the U.S. giving birth who belongs to any of the tribes mentioned in 8 USC 1401 (b), and under the circumstances mentioned in the provision, gives birth to a child whose citizenship will be determined by that law.

Once you are in the U.S. giving birth...that law is relevant. No matter where you come from.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
Obviously, I am correct. Why would the U.S. claim to have MORE jurisdiction over a tribe located in a foreign country than one on U.S. soil? They wouldn't. They couldn't.



Once you are in the U.S. giving birth...that law is relevant. No matter where you come from.

You must be tired, you just answered yourself, they didn't. The law did not apply to any tribe located in a foreign country.

Even with the laws original wording and things to back it up you want to claim that there isn't a leg to stand on.

Please don't waste any more time on arguing with me. Next time you might actually want to figure out what the other person is actually saying.


edit on 10-2-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Oh, I know what you are saying...that you agree with me.

And, “derp.”



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:30 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually I said that I agree with your original point but that wasn't the error that I was pointing out.

Sorry, but I edited, you are actually disagreeing with yourself, the US "wouldn't", "couldn't" claim to have any jurisdiction over a tribe located in a foreign country so the law "wouldn't", "couldn't" apply to them.
edit on 10-2-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: daskakik

Oh, I know what you are saying...that you agree with me.

And, “derp.”


AND just because someone gives birth in the U.S., it doesn’t mean they live in the U.S. They can simply be visiting or on vacation.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

No i’m not.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You don't have to live in the US for jus soli to apply.

Birth tourism



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually I said that I agree with your original point but that wasn't the error that I was pointing out.

Sorry, but I edited, you are actually disagreeing with yourself, the US "wouldn't", "couldn't" claim to have any jurisdiction over a tribe located in a foreign country so the law "wouldn't", "couldn't" apply to them.


So...how can they make such a child a U.S. Citizen at birth like you claim?



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Sure you are. You claim that a foreigner can refuse us citizenship for their child born in the US "if they are a member of a tribe anywhere in the world". They can refuse but it isn't for that reason. That is the nuance I have been going on about.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You don't have to live in the US for jus soli to apply.

Birth tourism


No sh*t, Sherlock.

You are the one claiming the U.S. has no jurisdiction over foreign children born on U.S. soil.

Get it now?



edit on 2/10/2018 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

They just have to fill in the forms at the hospital.

By the way that is also how some diplomats do it, although they shouldn't be able to.

Birthright Citizenship for Children of Foreign Diplomats



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Sure you are. You claim that a foreigner can refuse us citizenship for their child born in the US "if they are a member of a tribe anywhere in the world". They can refuse but it isn't for that reason. That is the nuance I have been going on about.


Nope. You said that. I quoted the State department saying a parent and guardian cannot renounce citizenship for child. More derp from you.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

" My point being is that any child born here is a citizen. "



Logic Dictates that a Child Born of an Illegal Foreign National on American Soil Cannot be Considered a Legal Citizen Protected by the Bill Of Rights .



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I'm not claiming that. I'm saying that a legal guardian can appeal to the laws of their country to refuse birthright citizenship of a child born in the US because they are foreigners, not because they belong to a tribe.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

And I pointed out that what you posted applies to US citizens and their children not foreigners and their children born in the US.

Try to keep up.



posted on Feb, 10 2018 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Sure you are. You claim that a foreigner can refuse us citizenship for their child born in the US "if they are a member of a tribe anywhere in the world". They can refuse but it isn't for that reason. That is the nuance I have been going on about.


Parents are NOT given an option about their child’s citizenship when they give birth!!!!

JESUS.

Is THIS what you have been thinking???




top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join